Insurance premium gone up from 150 to 230

askcompq

Are people seeing this with their own dogs (German shepherd female)?

What is the cause of it?

Thanks.

andreac

Did you have any claims this year?

askcompq

andreac wrote: »

Did you have any claims this year?

No I didn't

andreac

I would maybe ring them then and ask why it's gone up so much that's a huge jump. You could always change companies bit be careful if you do that as anything that your pet has been treated for won't be covered with the new company.

Nody

The only thing coming to mind would be if your dog's age has gone past a age threshold with the insurance company (i.e. any dogs beyond year X gets raised to a new category due to higher chance to future problems).

tk123

If it's a young dog and first renewal did you maybe get a discount when you signed up but are now paying full price?

the beer revolu

Can no one see what's going on with pet insurance?
Vet bills are rising as people are willing to spend far more money on their pets.
Vets encourage pet insurance.
More people take up insurance.
Vet bills rise further.
Insurance premiums rise.
Vet bills rise.
Insurance premiums rise.

Very soon you have a situation where nobody can afford pet health care without insurance.

Then Vets really can charge whatever they like and insurance companies will be happy to pay it and just increase the premium to cover the cost (and increase profit).

Before, vets had to be competitive. Once everyone has insurance, they can charge what they like. At this point, pet owners are not just supporting vets, they are also paying for the whole pet insurance industry.

Happy vets.
Happy insurance providers.
Pet owners footing the bill.

As we are well into this situation, I don't see how anything but the inevitable can happen now.

tk123

the beer revolu wrote: »

Can no one see what's going on with pet insurance?
Vet bills are rising as people are willing to spend far more money on their pets.
Vets encourage pet insurance.
More people take up insurance.
Vet bills rise further.
Insurance premiums rise.
Vet bills rise.
Insurance premiums rise.

Very soon you have a situation where nobody can afford pet health care without insurance.

Then Vets really can charge whatever they like and insurance companies will be happy to pay it and just increase the premium to cover the cost (and increase profit).

Before, vets had to be competitive. Once everyone has insurance, they can charge what they like. At this point, pet owners are not just supporting vets, they are also paying for the whole pet insurance industry.

Happy vets.
Happy insurance providers.
Pet owners footing the bill.

As we are well into this situation, I don't see how anything but the inevitable can happen now.

BS

Do you even have pet insurance? Have you ever had a pet who needed an unplanned operation - as in something serious and more than a simple spay or neuter? If you did you would have gotten a itemized bill from the vet and you'd have every cent accounted for. My vet does direct claim - which means they're out of pocket until the insurance pays out. They also do payment plans for clients so are in no way robbing clients.

the beer revolu

tk123 wrote: »

BS

Do you even have pet insurance? Have you ever had a pet who needed an unplanned operation - as in something serious and more than a simple spay or neuter? If you did you would have gotten a itemized bill from the vet and you'd have every cent accounted for. My vet does direct claim - which means they're out of pocket until the insurance pays out. They also do payment plans for clients so are in no way robbing clients.

Exactly what in my post is BS?

No I don't have pet insurance.
I thought that would be quite obvious.
I never suggested that vets just made up bills.
Why wouldn't a vet do direct claim? You're more likely to avail of their services that way - it's good business.
It's good to hear of vets still doing payment plans.
It would be interesting to see a survey of vet care cost since the introduction of pet insurance.
Yes it is great to have that piece of mind that insurance gives but it drives up the cost of pet health care for everyone.

I'm not saying all vets are crooks (although I have come across a few) but it is very much in vet's interest that all pet owners have insurance, as it is in the insurance companies interest, obviously.

tk123

the beer revolu wrote: »

Exactly what in my post is BS?

No I don't have pet insurance.
I thought that would be quite obvious.
I never suggested that vets just made up bills.
Why wouldn't a vet do direct claim? You're more likely to avail of their services that way - it's good business.
It's good to hear of vets still doing payment plans.
It would be interesting to see a survey of vet care cost since the introduction of pet insurance.
Yes it is great to have that piece of mind that insurance gives but it drives up the cost of pet health care for everyone.

I'm not saying all vets are crooks (although I have come across a few) but it is very much in vet's interest that all pet owners have insurance, as it is in the insurance companies interest, obviously.

Your post is BS because you've no idea what you're taking about and no experience of pet insurance. How does insurance drive up the cost of vet care exactly? You seem to think that insurance gives vets a carte blanche to change whatever they want because the insurance will automatically pay it when this isn't the case.

the beer revolu

tk123 wrote: »

Your post is BS because you've no idea what you're taking about and no experience of pet insurance. How does insurance drive up the cost of vet care exactly? You seem to think that insurance gives vets a carte blanche to change whatever they want because the insurance will automatically pay it when this isn't the case.

I have explained exactly how pet insurance drives up the cost of health care. Maybe you should read my original post again.
And I mean actually read it and think about it - not just dismiss it because you have pet insurance and like to have it (which is your right) and my post is against pet insurance.

I genuinely believe that Vets are increasing their prices and will continue to do so as more and more people take up insurance.I can't prove this to be the case, just as you can't prove the opposite.

There is also the fact that there is the whole pet insurance industry that must be supported and be profitable.

I can't stop people having pet insurance but it means that, collectively, pet owners are paying far more money on pet health care than prior to the advent of insurance.

You could insure a small car with the potential of millions liability for the cost of insuring a large dog. How does that add up?

I'd be interested in hearing an intelligent argument against my case.

tk123

the beer revolu wrote: »

You could insure a small car with the potential of millions liability for the cost of insuring a large dog. How does that add up?

How can my €500 car insurance policy cover the cost of replacing my €30k car or one twice or triple the price if I crash - it's insurance. They make their money on the fact that some people may never claim. I've claimed for one of my dogs and not the other (touch wood I never will) I didn't claim on my cat's policy until he died when he was 6. The excess on most policies is €75-100 - most people won't pay that on a vet visit for routine stuff.

the beer revolu

An intelligent argument?
Anyone?

tk123

the beer revolu wrote: »

An intelligent argument?
Anyone?

Any evidence to back up your claims?

the beer revolu

tk123 wrote: »

Any evidence to back up your claims?

Of course I don't.
You know that.
As you have no evidence to counter my claims.

No does anyone have anything constructive to add to the argument?
(I suspect tk is a vet or works in insurance)

tk123

the beer revolu wrote: »

Of course I don't.
You know that.
As you have no evidence to counter my claims.

No does anyone have anything constructive to add to the argument?
(I suspect tk is a vet or works in insurance)

No I don't work in a vets or insurance - my dog had surgery 3 months ago to save his life that was paid for by insurance so I know how it works and the value of it. I've also been here long enough to see posts from distraught owners who can't afford treatment wishing they had insurance.

DaisyD2

had to wait to insure my Daisy til she was microchipped. She was so small had to be done under anesthesia so waited til she was spayed at 6mths.

During recuperation she fell off bed damaging crucient knee requiring surgery costing almost €700, paid out of my pocket.

She was (happily! & declaring operation) insured as soon as I got €150 together.

Fast forward to week of 1st renewal & she swallowed dishwasher tablet & water from overflowing machine & nearly died.

A week in vet care, itemised bill & excess paid later, Insurers paid out directly despite week in care overlapping insurance date.

They didn't use it to either put up premium or not allow me to renew.

I still have not paid in premiums what they've paid out so I would always encourage people to take it out.

My vets prices have not changed in years I've been bringing her for boosters, checkups & treatments.

To address the OP I expect that if we're lucky enough to make 7yrs of age the premium will increase because in my research 7yrs seemed to be the cut off point for all insurers (new business).

muddypaws

I can see the point about insurance possibly pushing the cost of vet care up, would be interesting alright to see if that is true. Would also be interesting to see if owners with insurance get charged more than those without, but I guess those figures would never be released unless by someone working in a vets. It happens in the human health industry, so I'm assuming it would probably be the same in the animal one.

the beer revolu

Of course I understand the benefits of insurance.
Naturally someone who has made a large claim will be thrilled that they have insurance just as anyone who needs to pay out a large sum on care will wish that they had insurance.

However, none of the above means that pet insurance doesn't drive up the cost of pet health care. It also doesn't mean that it is priced fairly. Maybe as more players get into the market, there will be more competition and the price will come down.

How does it add up that I can insure a car, third party, with cover for millions in liability for the same price as insuring a dog with cover of, what? a few thousand? How is this fair insurance pricing?

Apparently mobile phone insurance is extortionately priced for what is covered, too. However, if I'd just lost/broke my phone and got a brand new one, I'd think it was great too.

DBB

the beer revolu wrote: »

An intelligent argument?
Anyone?

No does anyone have anything constructive to add to the argument?
(I suspect tk is a vet or works in insurance)

The beer revolu,
You're perfectly entitled and welcome to put up an argument for pet insurance driving up the cost of vet care.
However, posts like the above quoted do nothing to strengthen your argument, and speaking in such a passive-aggressive manner to other posters will not be tolerated.
You don't have to agree with each other, but it is a requirement of the charter that you're respectful towards one another.
Do not reply to this post on-thread.
Thanks,
DBB

boomerang

I can't see how pet insurance is driving up the cost of care, when most Irish people don't have pet insurance and the insurance companies themselves have vet personnel on staff to review claims and ensure they are not being fleeced by opportunistic vets.

OP That was a very cheap premium in the first year. Were there any introductory discounts, e.g. for the dog having been microchipped, having been neutered, etc? To be honest, €230 is ballpark for a pedigree dog. The premium on a crossbreed dog with no claims is less. My dog is pedigree and her annual premium is €250.

ferretone

boomerang wrote: »

I can't see how pet insurance is driving up the cost of care, when most Irish people don't have pet insurance and the insurance companies themselves have vet personnel on staff to review claims and ensure they are not being fleeced by opportunistic vets.

OP That was a very cheap premium in the first year. Were there any introductory discounts, e.g. for the dog having been microchipped, having been neutered, etc? To be honest, €230 is ballpark for a pedigree dog. The premium on a crossbreed dog with no claims is less. My dog is pedigree and her annual premium is €250.

I find that very disingenuous, routinely charging more for a pedigree dog, than for a crossbreed or mixed breed. There is absolutely no robust evidence that pedigrees, as a whole, are less healthy than their less aristocratic counterparts. Yes, there are certain breeds that are disproportionately likely to suffer very expensive consequences of the breeding that has gone on in recent decades, but those are already well covered by even more expensive premiums to insure.

I wonder if there is a perception that owners of pedigrees would be more prepared to go the extra mile, thus incurring more expensive bills, in the case of illness or injury to their dogs? If so, I'd say that is also misguided. There are many owners of pedigrees who came by them cheaply from certain websites, or otherwise from bybs etc, and equally many very responsible owners who have come by mixed breeds from rescue. There shouldn't be an automatic difference between the two for gauging insurance premiums. That just doesn't really make sense to me.

Millem

My girls have always been insured with Allianz. We pay around €500 for two, it was around €800 for three. Both my girls are or will be over 7 this policy year so we will have to pay 35% plus €100 for the excess. We have claimed thousands and thousands in vet bills. For me it gives me great piece for mind and I never have to worry about their bills.
One of my dogs never claims. I pay per month and they don't charge interest.

I hate to say though I do think some vets treat charge less non insured patients. A few years ago one of my girls was getting investigative work done in ucd, we had claimed €3,400 already so there was literally €600 left. I told them to ring me when they reached the €600 as we were only 6 days before we went into our new policy year and maybe some things could be delayed. They had reckoned it would cost around €800. Funnily enough I never got a phone call and everything was done for €600. When I pressed them on the issue they said it was fine and everything came in bang on €600

tk123

Millem wrote: »

I hate to say though I do think some vets treat charge less non insured patients. A few years ago one of my girls was getting investigative work done in ucd, we had claimed €3,400 already so there was literally €600 left. I told them to ring me when they reached the €600 as we were only 6 days before we went into our new policy year and maybe some things could be delayed. They had reckoned it would cost around €800. Funnily enough I never got a phone call and everything was done for €600. When I pressed them on the issue they said it was fine and everything came in bang on €600

I think they might just quote more to be safe? One of my quotes from them was hundreds less than they said it would be... Although I can't remember
If the second one was. It's all a blur .

Millem

tk123 wrote: »

I think they might just quote more to be safe? One of my quotes from them was hundreds less than they said it would be... Although I can't remember
If the second one was. It's all a blur .

Hmmmm..I don't know? Regardless anyway I still wouldn't be without insurance

fits

I don't think insurance is worthwhile for older dogs, as it will only cover 65% of bill beyond excess but certainly is for younger pets.

Millem

fits wrote: »

I don't think insurance is worthwhile for older dogs, as it will only cover 65% of bill beyond excess but certainly is for younger pets.

If your old dog is on expensive daily medication (which mine was) it is defo worth it. My dog was on metacam, propalin, incurrin and artriaid daily, she weighed 35kg so it was very expensive.

boomerang

Well my lady is a greyhound so a very robust and healthy breed thank god. So I feel kinda jipped that she qualifies as a pedigree - damn her tattooed ears!

I do broadly agree with you ferretone that it's a bit of a myth that crossbreeds are healthier, but if you asked me which of the following is likely to suffer hereditary diseases: Our springer x Boxer mutt, or a German Shepherd? Or a Cavalier? My money is definitely on the latter. I personally wouldn't begrudge paying more to cover one of those breeds as they are a health disaster, to be fair.

Remembering back, it didn't cost me any more to insure my Border Collie than it did to insure my Sheppie x Collie. So maybe it is certain breeds that are weighted heavily, in addition to the giant breeds, who all incur an additional cost?

ferretone wrote: »

I find that very disingenuous, routinely charging more for a pedigree dog, than for a crossbreed or mixed breed. There is absolutely no robust evidence that pedigrees, as a whole, are less healthy than their less aristocratic counterparts. Yes, there are certain breeds that are disproportionately likely to suffer very expensive consequences of the breeding that has gone on in recent decades, but those are already well covered by even more expensive premiums to insure.

.

boomerang

fits wrote: »

I don't think insurance is worthwhile for older dogs, as it will only cover 65% of bill beyond excess but certainly is for younger pets.

That's what they're banking on, unfortunately.